More Climate Silliness

The debate about global warming continues and the rhetoric has been getting louder and more strident, at least among the Warmists. As that has been happening the claims made by a number of the Warmists has become a bit over the top, and in some cases, bizarre. A case in point, this little bit of lunacy:

Scott Saleska, an associate professor of ecology and evolutionary biology at the University of Arizona who studies interactions between vegetation and climate, said that the researchers provide a potentially compelling argument for continued forest restoration and preservation by specifying the “climate impact” of vegetation.

Although the researchers saw a strong historical influence of carbon fertilization in carbon absorption, that exchange does have its limits, Saleska said. If carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere continue rising, more vegetation would be needed to maintain the size of the carbon sink Shevliakova and her colleagues reported.

“There is surely some limit to how long increasing carbon dioxide can continue to promote plant growth that absorbs carbon dioxide,” Saleska said. “Carbon dioxide is food for plants, and putting more food out there stimulates them to ‘eat’ more. However, just like humans, eventually they get full and putting more food out doesn’t stimulate more eating.” ( Emphasis mine – ed.)

Excuse me?Plants get full? Isn't that a bit of anthropomorphizing on Saleska's part? Plants aren't like humans. They don't have stomachs or digestive tracts to get 'full'. As long as they have sunlight, water, soil nutrients, and carbon dioxide they'll keep 'eating'. Saleska also seems to think the number of plants available to eat CO2 are finite, another mistake as plants will also reproduce at a faster rate, increasing CO2 uptake. As a professor of ecology and evolutionary biology he should know that.

Saleska also ignores the past as CO2 levels were much higher, 5000ppm and higher, and the plant life seemed to be able to handle it just fine. So did the animal life.

It seems to me that the Warmists have come to believe that the climate we experience now is the 'right' one even though we know that isn't true. Climate will change and unless we develop a means of actually controlling the climate รก la Star Trek, there's little or nothing we can do to stop it. Even the Warmists agree that even with draconian measures short of genocide our efforts will have little effect on global temps. Even that assumes their defective climate models are correct, which we know is not the case.